From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Lambda Subject: Re: Question regarding git fetch Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 08:24:12 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <1251465852993-3534609.post@n2.nabble.com> References: <1251387045053-3527289.post@n2.nabble.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Aug 28 15:24:24 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Mh1RG-0003Yv-7U for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:24:22 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751183AbZH1NYM (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:24:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751163AbZH1NYM (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:24:12 -0400 Received: from 216-139-236-80.aus.us.siteprotect.com ([216.139.236.80]:2260 "EHLO jim.nabble.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751160AbZH1NYL (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:24:11 -0400 Received: from jim ([127.0.0.1]) by jim.nabble.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 28 Aug 2009 08:24:12 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1251387045053-3527289.post@n2.nabble.com> X-Nabble-From: tom.lambda@gmail.com X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2009 13:24:12.0993 (UTC) FILETIME=[D567EB10:01CA27E2] Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Thank you all for your answers and the interesting following discussion. >>From a user perspective (I do not know how git works internally), the approach proposed by Juno looks very intuitive to me. Now I understand there are other cases and users to take into account, which make the implementation complex. I hope this will be part of git 1.7.0. --Tom -- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Question-regarding-git-fetch-tp3527289p3534609.html Sent from the git mailing list archive at Nabble.com.